Why does MMA count as an own martial art now ?

[RTKDCMB]

And which system, or art is that?

Rhee Taekwondo (The Australian one not the American one). I thought I had the details in my profile but I didn't.

 

[TSDTexan]

Rhee Taekwondo (The Australian one not the American one). I thought I had the details in my profile but I didn't.

As far as I am aware:
The ITFA teaches ITF-style Taekwon-Do which follows the syllabus laid down by the Founder, General Choi Hong Hi, in the Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia. The syllabus includes Patterns, Step-Sparring, Free Sparring, Destruction or breaking, Martial Art Terminology, Self-Defence and Moral Culture.


As far as I am aware, General Choi didn't have a groundfighting Curriculum. And headbutting, and gripfighting generally isn't taught in most TKD places.

Prior to the formation of the and the ITF, and the ITFA, Chong Chul Rhee was a Dan under the The Korea Taekwon-Do Association (KTA; 1959/1961) which also didn't have ground fighting like Sambo, JJJ or BJJ.

So I am curious as to how your school has integrated these into your Rhee TKD.

 

[TSDTexan]

Silly phone never posts these right.

So JohnnyEnglish doesn't consider MMA to be a "real martial art", but if you look at Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which had a MASSIVE library of techniques, a system of standup fighting, and ground fighting, and kneeling fighting... armed and unarmed fighting.... You could go to Daitō and see this "traditional" martial art almost perfectly mirrors the curriculum of MMA.

Aiki spawned Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which is the artform that led to creation of arts like Sumo wrestling, Akido, Judo, many Japanese systems of Jujutsu, Kendo, Hapkido, Shorinji Kenpo (hybrid), Icho-ryū and Hakko-ryu draw many techniques from Daitō-ryū jujutsu, and even Brazilian Jiu Jitsu

Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, takedowns, throws, standup fighting and groundfighting.

Why does this system get accepted as a valid martial art?
but MMA doesn't?


In the 1920, Carlos Gracie took out an ad in the paper saying "If you want to get your face beaten and well-smashed, and if you want broken arms, look for me at this address."

JohnnyEnglish didn't like my question, apparently, and chose to down vote it. However, He still didn't answer the question.

Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, take-downs, throws, stand-up fighting joint locks, breaks and ground-fighting.

So let me ask Johnny again...
Why does this traditional martial art system get accepted as a valid martial art but MMA doesn't?

 

[RTKDCMB]

As far as I am aware:
The ITFA teaches ITF-style Taekwon-Do which follows the syllabus laid down by the Founder, General Choi Hong Hi, in the Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia. The syllabus includes Patterns, Step-Sparring, Free Sparring, Destruction or breaking, Martial Art Terminology, Self-Defence and Moral Culture.


As far as I am aware, General Choi didn't have a groundfighting Curriculum. And headbutting, and gripfighting generally isn't taught in most TKD places.

Prior to the formation of the and the ITF, and the ITFA, Chong Chul Rhee was a Dan under the The Korea Taekwon-Do Association (KTA; 1959/1961) which also didn't have ground fighting like Sambo, JJJ or BJJ.

So I am curious as to how your school has integrated these into your Rhee TKD.

Chapters 3, 4 and 5 in the Encyclopedia show a number of ground techniques. We do not incorporate Sambo, BJJ or JJJ into our curriculum. Unless a particular instructor had previously trained in one of those systems then he/she will introduce some techniques here and there when they teach. We don't teach ground fighting, we teach ground self defence and self defence on the ground has been taught in Rhee TKD the whole time I have been there.

 

[Tez3]

So let me ask Johnny again...

You may not get an answer, he's asked on the 'Beginner's section' to have his account deleted. You can read what he says about us there.
which strangely he seems to have removed so 'as you were'!

 

[Langenschwert]

Tell me, which single art has formalized training curriculum and methods for fighting at the following ranges
1. Rifle, pistol, bow, slingshot etc. Ranges
2. Handheld long weapons
3. Kicking and short weapons
4. Punching
5. Trapping/throwing/tripping/Kido wrist locking and breaking
6. clinching/elbows/knees/
7. Headblows/shoulder striking.
8. Ground fighting

As far as I am aware... There is no single system teaching a full range spectrum, and fully handles transitions between ranges.

Ours HEMA curriculum gets pretty close. Back in the day, you would be trained to do all that from a very young age. Fiore dei Liberi was an artillery officer, so there's some incredible long range stuff he did in addition to the art of arms. Oh right, and they did it all the close range stuff on horseback in addition to on foot.

We train longsword (which can be thrown like a spear so technically a ranged weapon heh heh), messer (short sword), knife, striking, takedowns, breaks, and some basic ground work.

I round out my training personally with Japanese martial arts, mostly battojutsu and judo.

Also, I can't believe these kind of of MMA isn't XYZ threads are still happening in 2015. MMA is what it is. I like it, but the halcyon days of Couture, Franklin and Lidell are long gone.

 

[Chris Parker]

Something Johnny English is missing is that a pure art like
Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu had a library of like 3800 techniques, armed unarmed, standing and ground fighting.

Firstly, define "pure art" in regards to Daito Ryu. Secondly, please detail the ne-waza found in Daito Ryu, including the section(s) found.

Out Of this many other arts

Out of Daito Ryu, some arts. Aikido, Danzan Ryu, Hakko Ryu… maybe one or two others…

So JohnnyEnglish doesn't consider MMA to be a "real martial art", but if you look at Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which had a MASSIVE library of techniques, a system of standup fighting, and ground fighting, and kneeling fighting... armed and unarmed fighting.... You could go to Daitō and see this "traditional" martial art almost perfectly mirrors the curriculum of MMA.

Er…. no. There is no ne-waza in Daito Ryu… it's syllabus is separated into three different forms… tachi waza (standing), idori waza (suwari gata - seated techniques), and hanza handachi (half seated, half standing… one partner stands, the other is seated). In fact, each technique is supposed to be done in each of these forms.

And, no, Daito Ryu does not "almost perfectly mirror the curriculum of MMA". At all. I hardly know what you're meaning when you say "you could go to Daito and see this…"… do you think "Daito" is a place?

Aiki spawned Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu which is the artform that led to creation of arts like Sumo wrestling, Akido, Judo, many Japanese systems of Jujutsu, Kendo, Hapkido, Shorinji Kenpo (hybrid), Icho-ryū and Hakko-ryu draw many techniques from Daitō-ryū jujutsu, and even Brazilian Jiu Jitsu

"Aiki spawned Daito Ryu"? Er… huh? And are you seriously suggesting that Daito Ryu, in existence only since the late 19th Century, led to the creation of Sumo?!?! Kendo?? Judo?!? Shorinji Kempo?? BJJ?!?

Dude. No.

Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, takedowns, throws, standup fighting and ground fighting.

Again… no ground fighting… and, no. Daito Ryu doesn't have "everything you would need in an MMA cage"… namely, it doesn't have anything geared up for fighting in an MMA cage.

Why does this system get accepted as a valid martial art?
but MMA doesn't?

Er… who says MMA doesn't?

The 100-year-old art of Brazilian Jiu Jitsu has punches and kicks. It is a traditional martial art. It may not have every single technique found in an MMA school, but odds are it can do just fine in an MMA rules fight.

Er… okay.

In the 1920, Carlos Gracie took out an ad in the paper saying "If you want to get your face beaten and well-smashed, and if you want broken arms, look for me at this address."

Carlos was taught jujutsu by Maeda, who also spiced it up with a few things Maeda learned from "catch" wrestlers (ones that he had dueled in England.)

Helio Gracie set the record straight, that Maeda did not teach any striking to the Gracies.

Er… okay.

It was a little known fact that Maeda was a jujutsu-ka that had switched over to Kodokan Judo.

"Little known fact"?!? Really?

He said that Maeda was teaching not Kodokan Judo, but a Classical Jujutsu [often called "Kozen or Kosen Judo", by the Judoka, which is regular judo + higher teaching that incorporated from material in other branches of jujutsu, including techniques that were used in Ne-waza]

Once again, Kosen Judo (High School Judo) didn't come into being in JAPAN until 1914… Maeda left Japan by 1906… and Kosen Judo does not "incorporate material from other branches of jujutsu"… that's a statement that's flawed from every angle… including the fact that differing systems are not "branches" of jujutsu…

So clearly either Carlos Gracie was already a striker when he learned Jujutsu from Maeda, or learned striking after the fact.
Helio Gracie Sets Record Straight Maeda Was Teaching us Jiu-Jitsu Not Judo Bjj Eastern Europe

Well, honestly, I wouldn't put too much stock in the way that interview presents history… for one thing, there's an emphasis that Maeda wasn't teaching "judo", he was teaching "jiujitsu"… well, yeah… that's what the Kodokan was known for at the time… Kano-ha Jujutsu (jiujitsu). So no kidding. That said, the minimal amount of striking (and the lack of sophistication in what there is) doesn't really show that Carlos was "already a striker" at all… instead, it shows that in BJJ's development (through Vale Tudo and similar contests) it encountered strikers, and came up with methods to handle them (building on Maeda's methods).

None the less, for over 95 years, since 1920 BJJ has been a grappling and striking art... and it definitely is a traditional martial art.

Er… okay.

It is worth noting here that while the name ‘judo’ has become the accepted term for Dr. Jigoro Kano’s martial art, at the time many still referred to the style as ‘ju-jitsu’, or even ‘Kano ju-jitsu’. Maeda, like so many others, had come Kano's school having studied other ju-jitsu ryu previously.

Okay… and…?

While the more common Romanization is ‘jujitsu’, in Brazil the spelling ‘jiu-jitsu’ stuck, and has retained that extra ‘i’ ever since.

Yeah, you're really going to have to follow developments there… I mean… that romanization (jiu-jitsu) was common at the time… currently, it's considered an incorrect form (going by Hepburn romanization), although there are alternate forms (jyu-jutsu, jiu-jutsu, ju-jutu, jyujutu, and so on). In a real way, if you want to spell it correctly, there are two methods: 柔術, or じゅうじゅつ.

Tell me, which single art has formalized training curriculum and methods for fighting at the following ranges
1. Rifle, pistol, bow, slingshot etc. Ranges
2. Handheld long weapons
3. Kicking and short weapons
4. Punching
5. Trapping/throwing/tripping/Kido wrist locking and breaking
6. clinching/elbows/knees/
7. Headblows/shoulder striking.
8. Ground fighting

As far as I am aware... There is no single system teaching a full range spectrum, and fully handles transitions between ranges.

Come visit my schools.

1: Long range (projectile weapons) include archery, throwing spikes and stars, blowguns, and (in our modern approach) firearms and firearm defence.
2: Handheld long weapons include rokushaku bo, yonshaku jo, hanbo, katana, kodachi, yari, naginata, nagamaki, and so on.
3: Kicking and short weapons include, well, kicking, as well as tanto, jutte, tessen, bogyaku dori (te giri bo), kunai, (in our modern approach) baton, torch, tactical pen, and more.
4: Punching. Well, we have a lot more in our hand-striking methods than just punching… but… sure.
5: Trapping, throwing, tripping, locking (not gonna use the term "kido"… the very image is just, well, wrong… I mean, we're a Japanese jujutsu-centric system… it's kinda what we do.
6: Clinching, elbows, knees… yep, got them all. Clinching, to us, is kumiuchi, elbows are shukki-ken, knees are sokki ken…
7: Headblows/shoulders striking… yep. We call a head but a zu-tsuki (literally head thrust) or kikaku ken… shoulder strikes come under tai ken (body weapons)…
8: Ground fighting. And, again, yep. Although, as with many traditional Japanese systems, it's almost non-existent in the old material, and comes up in our modern approach.

This, by the way, is far from an exhaustive list… I mean, we haven't covered flexible weaponry, de-escalation, or many, many other areas we cover. So… your point is?

Daitō-ryū Aiki-jūjutsu has everything you would need in an MMA cage... punches, kicks, take-downs, throws, stand-up fighting joint locks, breaks and ground-fighting.

One more time, there is no ground fighting in Daito Ryu… but, far more importantly, do you seriously think that it's this vague grouping of technical approaches (devoid of any actual context that would ground your claims in reality) are what would make Daito Ryu suitable or not to an MMA match? Not in the slightest…

So let me ask Johnny again...
Why does this traditional martial art system get accepted as a valid martial art but MMA doesn't?

You won't get an answer from him, as he's no longer a member here.

 

[TSDTexan]

Firstly, define "pure art" in regards to Daito Ryu. Secondly, please detail the ne-waza found in Daito Ryu, including the section(s) found.



Out of Daito Ryu, some arts. Aikido, Danzan Ryu, Hakko Ryu… maybe one or two others…



Er…. no. There is no ne-waza in Daito Ryu… it's syllabus is separated into three different forms… tachi waza (standing), idori waza (suwari gata - seated techniques), and hanza handachi (half seated, half standing… one partner stands, the other is seated). In fact, each technique is supposed to be done in each of these forms.

And, no, Daito Ryu does not "almost perfectly mirror the curriculum of MMA". At all. I hardly know what you're meaning when you say "you could go to Daito and see this…"… do you think "Daito" is a place?



"Aiki spawned Daito Ryu"? Er… huh? And are you seriously suggesting that Daito Ryu, in existence only since the late 19th Century, led to the creation of Sumo?!?! Kendo?? Judo?!? Shorinji Kempo?? BJJ?!?

Dude. No.



Again… no ground fighting… and, no. Daito Ryu doesn't have "everything you would need in an MMA cage"… namely, it doesn't have anything geared up for fighting in an MMA cage.



Er… who says MMA doesn't?



Er… okay.



Er… okay.



"Little known fact"?!? Really?



Once again, Kosen Judo (High School Judo) didn't come into being in JAPAN until 1914… Maeda left Japan by 1906… and Kosen Judo does not "incorporate material from other branches of jujutsu"… that's a statement that's flawed from every angle… including the fact that differing systems are not "branches" of jujutsu…



Well, honestly, I wouldn't put too much stock in the way that interview presents history… for one thing, there's an emphasis that Maeda wasn't teaching "judo", he was teaching "jiujitsu"… well, yeah… that's what the Kodokan was known for at the time… Kano-ha Jujutsu (jiujitsu). So no kidding. That said, the minimal amount of striking (and the lack of sophistication in what there is) doesn't really show that Carlos was "already a striker" at all… instead, it shows that in BJJ's development (through Vale Tudo and similar contests) it encountered strikers, and came up with methods to handle them (building on Maeda's methods).



Er… okay.



Okay… and…?



Yeah, you're really going to have to follow developments there… I mean… that romanization (jiu-jitsu) was common at the time… currently, it's considered an incorrect form (going by Hepburn romanization), although there are alternate forms (jyu-jutsu, jiu-jutsu, ju-jutu, jyujutu, and so on). In a real way, if you want to spell it correctly, there are two methods: 柔術, or じゅうじゅつ.



Come visit my schools.

1: Long range (projectile weapons) include archery, throwing spikes and stars, blowguns, and (in our modern approach) firearms and firearm defence.
2: Handheld long weapons include rokushaku bo, yonshaku jo, hanbo, katana, kodachi, yari, naginata, nagamaki, and so on.
3: Kicking and short weapons include, well, kicking, as well as tanto, jutte, tessen, bogyaku dori (te giri bo), kunai, (in our modern approach) baton, torch, tactical pen, and more.
4: Punching. Well, we have a lot more in our hand-striking methods than just punching… but… sure.
5: Trapping, throwing, tripping, locking (not gonna use the term "kido"… the very image is just, well, wrong… I mean, we're a Japanese jujutsu-centric system… it's kinda what we do.
6: Clinching, elbows, knees… yep, got them all. Clinching, to us, is kumiuchi, elbows are shukki-ken, knees are sokki ken…
7: Headblows/shoulders striking… yep. We call a head but a zu-tsuki (literally head thrust) or kikaku ken… shoulder strikes come under tai ken (body weapons)…
8: Ground fighting. And, again, yep. Although, as with many traditional Japanese systems, it's almost non-existent in the old material, and comes up in our modern approach.

This, by the way, is far from an exhaustive list… I mean, we haven't covered flexible weaponry, de-escalation, or many, many other areas we cover. So… your point is?



One more time, there is no ground fighting in Daito Ryu… but, far more importantly, do you seriously think that it's this vague grouping of technical approaches (devoid of any actual context that would ground your claims in reality) are what would make Daito Ryu suitable or not to an MMA match? Not in the slightest…



You won't get an answer from him, as he's no longer a member here.

Thank you Chris.

But I remember that you "corrected", me already on the Daito Ryu didn't lead to BJJ so much of this is a redundant correction.

Secondly, this is really old
This was written before you "corrected" me, of course I could be wrong with regard to which happened first.
But I feel pretty secure in saying so.

I expect you will come across more of the same at some point. Please dont repeat yourself on DRAJJ not being the Jujutsu that BJJ came from. I have heard you, clearly on this matter already.
While you and I may not agree on this matter, I am not advocating a position that I am right and you are wrong.
I am more agnostic about it. You feel my position is wrong.

That's fine.

You have told me so. And I have acknowledged that you have told me so. I am not yet persuaded on the matter, and I suspect that I won't be for a while.

Further discussion about this specific topic ideally should be held in a separate thread.

Thirdly, I am glad your schools are pretty well rounded,
And equip students to fight and to transition between ranges. Not that my happiness means anything at all, but it makes me happy to hear when schools dont send students ill-prepared, and with gapping holes in their skill set.

And yes conflict avoiding and deescalation are both pretty helpful self defense measures. Glad this is in your teaching.

Fourthly, re Hepburn and Romanization of jujutsu and jiu jitsu. It was correct to the Japanese people who were instructing the Brazilians, otherwise they would have told their students to correct the spelling.

And a hundred years of spelling it that way is barking up wrong tree, if you think they are going to change, for us or any one else.
Its fait acompli.

The only time I have an objection to the use of the spelling Jiu Jitsu by someone is if they are referring to something non-bjj. Like any Japanese Jujutsu.

Fiftly,
you are late in telling me Johhny is gone. I have been told about 6 times already. As this is an older post, it is understandable that this could happen. My last message to him was on the Sixth of Aug. You are telling me on the Twenty Fourth. But, I do appreciate you trying to let me know. That was thoughtful and generous on your part.

Lastly,
You mentioned you have schools. May I inquire as to the name of your art?

 

[ballen0351]

You mentioned you have schools. May I inquire as to the name of your art?

Click the website in his signature

 

[Chris Parker]

Thank you Chris.

But I remember that you "corrected", me already on the Daito Ryu didn't lead to BJJ so much of this is a redundant correction.

Hmm… you seem to have noticed three words out of my entire post… yeah, I corrected your take on Daito Ryu being part of the history of BJJ again… but I also gave new corrections to your other ideas on Daito Ryu… most in particular that there is any ne-waza there… as well as the idea that it helped form sumo and other arts.

Secondly, this is really old
This was written before you "corrected" me, of course I could be wrong with regard to which happened first.
But I feel pretty secure in saying so.

Once again, you're fixated on a couple of words out of the whole thing, and missing what you were actually being informed of.

I expect you will come across more of the same at some point. Please dont repeat yourself on DRAJJ not being the Jujutsu that BJJ came from. I have heard you, clearly on this matter already.

Read the rest of the post… seriously… three words…

While you are doing that, if you wouldn't mind answering what I actually asked… namely, can you define "pure art" as it relates to Daito Ryu, and secondly, can you detail where you feel the ne-waza is in Daito Ryu, including the section of the ryu in which is it found, and any details as to the material itself?

While you and I may not agree on this matter, I am not advocating a position that I am right and you are wrong.
I am more agnostic about it. You feel my position is wrong.

You're "agnostic" on the topic? How does that work? You don't know for sure, so you won't listen to someone who does? And what makes you think historical facts and records are a matter of opinion? This mentality is, frankly, disturbing.

That's fine.

Okay…

You have told me so. And I have acknowledged that you have told me so. I am not yet persuaded on the matter, and I suspect that I won't be for a while.

Then read more.

Look, frankly, at this point it's like you saying that the sun rises in the West, to which I then reply that it actually rises in the East… then point to the sun in the morning in the East, saying "there it is"… and you saying "maybe you're right, maybe you're not… I'm agnostic on this, and am yet to be persuaded".

Dude. This isn't opinion. It's not a matter of perspective. It's factual reality. You can not be persuaded all you want, but it's like arguing that the sun rises in the West… you're just going to look ill-informed at best, and wilfully ignorant to boot.

Further discussion about this specific topic ideally should be held in a separate thread.

Sure… then might I suggest you stop bringing into various topics an art you obviously know so little about. I mean… I'm only responding to what you brought in, not bringing it up myself.

Thirdly, I am glad your schools are pretty well rounded,
And equip students to fight and to transition between ranges. Not that my happiness means anything at all, but it makes me happy to hear when schools dont send students ill-prepared, and with gapping holes in their skill set.

Honestly, even with the list above, you have no idea whether or not my schools do any of the kind… the idea of "gaping holes (one 'p', by the way…)" in skill sets is honestly a false idea. So is looking for a set of vague, context-less "skills" as you brought up.

And yes conflict avoiding and deescalation are both pretty helpful self defense measures. Glad this is in your teaching.

Okay.

Fourthly, re Hepburn and Romanization of jujutsu and jiu jitsu. It was correct to the Japanese people who were instructing the Brazilians, otherwise they would have told their students to correct the spelling.

You understand that this makes no sense, yeah? I mean… the Japanese weren't exactly learning English spelling and romanization of their words… so they wouldn't have had any way of "correcting" anything…

And a hundred years of spelling it that way is barking up wrong tree, if you think they are going to change, for us or any one else.
Its fait accompli.

Er… what? I get what you're trying to say, but… maybe more work on syntax?

The only time I have an objection to the use of the spelling Jiu Jitsu by someone is if they are referring to something non-bjj. Like any Japanese Jujutsu.

Many Western systems use the "jitsu" spelling… so you know…

Fiftly,
you are late in telling me Johhny is gone. I have been told about 6 times already. As this is an older post, it is understandable that this could happen. My last message to him was on the Sixth of Aug. You are telling me on the Twenty Fourth. But, I do appreciate you trying to let me know. That was thoughtful and generous on your part.

Well, here, only Tez had said anything (once)… only saying that he'd requested to have his account deleted (we don't do that here). Couple that with the fact that it's difficult to see if a member has been banned (you have to go onto their member page to find out), it wasn't clear that the message had been passed to you.

Oh, and the phrase you're looking for is that it was "informative" of me. Nothing to do with thoughtfulness or generosity.

Lastly,
You mentioned you have schools. May I inquire as to the name of your art?

As mentioned, look to the website in my signature for one of the things I do.

 

[elder999]

Thank you Chris.

But I remember that you "corrected", me already on the Daito Ryu didn't lead to BJJ so much of this is a redundant correction.

Secondly, this is really old
This was written before you "corrected" me, of course I could be wrong with regard to which happened first.
But I feel pretty secure in saying so.

I expect you will come across more of the same at some point. Please dont repeat yourself on DRAJJ not being the Jujutsu that BJJ came from. I have heard you, clearly on this matter already.
While you and I may not agree on this matter, I am not advocating a position that I am right and you are wrong.
I am more agnostic about it. You feel my position is wrong.

That's fine.

You have told me so. And I have acknowledged that you have told me so. I am not yet persuaded on the matter, and I suspect that I won't be for a while.

Dude, seriously?

I had a full-on apocalyptic catastrophe nightmare, last night, the first in a long time, so I can waste a little time persuading you-it's a matter of simple history, really:

Maeda Mitsuyo taught the Gracies judo-Kodokan judo. Pre-war judo, that was sometimes called Kano jujutsu. While there's some argument that there were men who studied with Takeda Sokaku (Daito ryu) among the earlier members of the Kodokan, there's no evidence at all that Maeda was one of those.
Takeda kept extensive records of those who studied Daito ryu-Maeda's name isn't in there.
There is no ground fighting per se in Daito ryu, though its principles can be used in ground fighting.

Mitsuyo Maeda - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BJJ comes from judo, and whatever else the Gracie's grafted on afterwards: a little boxing, a little catch wrestling,Helio Gracie's inventions of different angles and transitions, but it's still Basically Just Judo

Wherever you got this information from, that BJJ comes from Daito ryu, is just wrong.

As are you.

 

[TSDTexan]

Wherever you got this information from, that BJJ comes from Daito ryu, is just wrong.

As are you.

Part A. Your statement regarding where: I got my information being wrong... Perfectly good statement, in the sense that it is clear that you are asserting that this information is incorrect.

Part B.
Your statement "as are you" is problematic in the least. You are being pretty vague, and this statement requires the reader to make guesses as to the meaning.

Are you implying that "TsdTexan is just wrong" in some sort of personal sense? Gosh, I hope not.

Surely, you wouldn't need to use an ad hominem attack, after you clearly destroyed what you think is TsdTexan's position.

Though I will admit the Maeda-Takada is a great strawman. Argument. It is a verifiable fact, as Takeda kept meticulous records as to who attended his seminars and classes, and Yes, Maeda probably isn't listed. I never even bothered to look or inquire.

The point is completely bogus because it is not something I brought to bear in supporting my position. Namely that the art form that came to be known as DRAJJ had a role in the formation of what would come to be called BJJ.

Nowhere at anytime ever... Not even once have I ever said Maeda was a student of Takeda.

So if you would like to join in the discussion already in progress, and argue against my position, PLEASE argue against what was actually said by me, instead of things I NEVER said.

If you are willing to put words into TsdTexan's mouth, so you can defeat such an expressed view... We have no reasonable basis of conversation here on this topic.

I would like to enjoy friendly martial arts talk with you. But let us remain reasonable fellows and not put words in each others mouth like this... Please?

 

[Steve]

I've got a great idea. Let's get the thread back on topic. The origins of BJJ are interesting, and the relationship between BJJ and the various threads of japanese jujutsu is loads of fun, but has no bearing on the topic at hand.

 

[TSDTexan]

I've got a great idea. Let's get the thread back on topic. The origins of BJJ are interesting, and the relationship between BJJ and the various threads of japanese jujutsu is loads of fun, but has no bearing on the topic at hand.

Great Idea. Just what exactly was the actual topic?
The original poster posted the Original Post (redundancy is redundant) asking: So how did it happen that we call MMA an own martial art now?

This is a hard question to answer (I think). JohnnyEnglish was asking was something along the lines of "How". So, how did, We come to call a collection of martial arts, as practiced by a multitude of artists, and technicians/crafters in the combat sport promotion and event systems of today, the term Martial Art?

Part of the problem, that I see, is that no one can seem to come up with an objective standard to determine a meaning to the phrase "martial art" that can be agreed up as a consensus view that satisfies everyone. I ran into the problem when I tried to get the MT community to define the difference between what is, and what is not a martial art. Like the terms beauty, or as a judge described pornography... many cannot define it, but know it when they see it. But for whatever reason, it seems that no one will agree on terms.

Like Tony D. said, He is a description-ist, and thinks Chris is a proscriptionist. This is just one paradigm, among a few, that challenges the effort of defining martial art/arts. Until terms can be defined, to such a degree, that views can be articulated with fine deftness, our discussions will pretty much devolve into caricatures of the thing being described rather than Hi-Def renderings.

Other things that hinder the OP's question and answer search... such as, the issue: by what definition to we use for the term MMA in his question.
Modern MMA with ground-fighting like the OP brought up, or other MMA events that didn't have ground fighting (K1).
The OP seems to include one but then he excludes the others.
We are left to accept his inaccuracy in term use, as a forgone conclusion, as we try to search for an answer.

And... what about martial arts that are a fork, or a split away from sanctioned combative sport towards real world or reality based self-defense oriented MA.

Stuff that looks at the combative sports for validation of techniques and strategies that work in the purpose of submitting a resisting opponent or rendering him unconscious but instead of records, winning belts, and rankings have a different application and underlying goal or philosophy. Like maybe self-preservation, and property loss prevention.

 

[elder999]

The point is completely bogus because it is not something I brought to bear in supporting my position. Namely that the art form that came to be known as DRAJJ had a role in the formation of what would come to be called BJJ.

Nowhere at anytime ever... Not even once have I ever said Maeda was a student of Takeda.

So if you would like to join in the discussion already in progress, and argue against my position, PLEASE argue against what was actually said by me, instead of things I NEVER said.

If you are willing to put words into TsdTexan's mouth, so you can defeat such an expressed view... We have no reasonable basis of conversation here on this topic.

I would like to enjoy friendly martial arts talk with you. But let us remain reasonable fellows and not put words in each others mouth like this... Please?

You're still wrong As in factually and fundamentally incorrect.

BJJ came from judo. Kano invented judo. Kano did not study Daito ryu. It's said that one throw-one-might have come to him through one of his students, much like he gleaned kata garuma, the fireman's carry, from wrestling. No daito ryu of any significance to be called "an influence, " though. We have a pretty fair record of what Kano studied, and daito ryu isn't in the mix.

Kanō Jigorō - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, you're wrong.

Nothing "problematic" about that. It apparently happens all the time.

 

[TSDTexan]

You're still wrong As in factually and fundamentally incorrect.

BJJ came from judo. Kano invented judo. Kano did not study Daito ryu. It's said that one throw-one-might have come to him through one of his students, much like he gleaned kata garuma, the fireman's carry, from wrestling. No daito ryu of any significance to be called "an influence, " though. We have a pretty fair record of what Kano studied, and daito ryu isn't in the mix.

Kanō Jigorō - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So, you're wrong.

Nothing "problematic" about that. It apparently happens all the time.

Did Kano create the entire Kodakan curriculum by himself in a vacuum? Yes or No
Did Kano ever bring in outsiders to teach new material to his school? Yes or No

If anything, Kano was far more more jujutsu editor for his school curriculm than inventor of new techniques for his school.

Even the term Judo itself pre-existed Kano's own art.

The point of contention between Chris and Myself, is on hold, with His position not being further challenged by me while I am doing research.

I notice that you have not acknowledged the truth, of the fact, that you used a strawman attack against my position, and were called on it.

This was called to your attention, because, again this wasn't about my main point... the one that was offered to watergal (bjj/drjj) being right or wrong. This was about your attacking a position, I never held, and declaring my position wrong because of that point.

I hear the silence... and the changing of the attack.

But, this is my last post re:drajj and bjj on this thread. In other words, you can have the last word about it, because I am not continuing to argue about the subject, I will listen to your answers to my questions without response. But try and stay on topic for the thread please. I know I am going to try to do so.

 

[Drose427]

As far as I am aware:
The ITFA teaches ITF-style Taekwon-Do which follows the syllabus laid down by the Founder, General Choi Hong Hi, in the Taekwon-Do Encyclopedia. The syllabus includes Patterns, Step-Sparring, Free Sparring, Destruction or breaking, Martial Art Terminology, Self-Defence and Moral Culture.


As far as I am aware, General Choi didn't have a groundfighting Curriculum. And headbutting, and gripfighting generally isn't taught in most TKD places.

Prior to the formation of the and the ITF, and the ITFA, Chong Chul Rhee was a Dan under the The Korea Taekwon-Do Association (KTA; 1959/1961) which also didn't have ground fighting like Sambo, JJJ or BJJ.

So I am curious as to how your school has integrated these into your Rhee TKD.

This very much depends on the school/association

Like yourself, my system is TSD. My KJN trained under Rhee for much of his life, and we've always done headbutts, Judo Style grappling in SD for color belts, starting at 1st dan Takedowns become a regular part of sparring.

That said, the floor in our new space is gonna make these things hurt a great bit more and increase the risk of injury so people are less inclined to do them since we;ve moved

 

[elder999]

I hear the silence... and the changing of the attack.

But, this is my last post re:drajj and bjj on this thread. In other words, you can have the last word about it, because I am not continuing to argue about the subject, I will listen to your answers to my questions without response. But try and stay on topic for the thread please. I know I am going to try to do so.

DRAJJ is not ideally suited for the cage. It has no ne waza to speak of

You're still wrong.

 

[Tez3]

The OP stated several times before he left us that he hated MMA, that it was disgusting, barbaric and generally not nice so we can take from his question he was questioning the fact it existed and was actually recognised by some instead of being outlawed. He really does detest MMA so you can be sure that the question wasn't asked with any good intentions.

 

[TSDTexan]

This very much depends on the school/association

Like yourself, my system is TSD. My KJN trained under Rhee for much of his life, and we've always done headbutts, Judo Style grappling in SD for color belts, starting at 1st dan Takedowns become a regular part of sparring.

That said, the floor in our new space is gonna make these things hurt a great bit more and increase the risk of injury so people are less inclined to do them since we;ve moved

You seriously make me want to sail down to Perth for a few weeks. I mean that. I love TSD, or TSD under any other name... As much as I love Okinawan "Te" under any name.
I have been to NSW, and QL so many times but I have never been further west into Oz than Alice Springs, back before they renamed Ayers Rock to Uluru in 2002 under a reversal of the 1993 dual name policy. Maybe some day I will get to pet some Perth wallabies.